It seems to me that the AC 300 4x4 has a few features the honda 350 4x4 doesn't ,such as indepedent suspention,all around disk brakes,4.7 gal tank,more ground clearence,2wd or 4wd shifting,more suspension travel.

Are there any problems with the 2000 or 2001 AC that i should know about?.

P.S. i posted a similar question on the AC page of this site.
(i am not trying to cause an argument between Honda and AC,but i would like some input before i decide what to buy).

 

both machines are good but the honda and artic cat have about the same amount of gc. yes the artic cat is full of fetures but the honda is one tuff machine. imo the honda has a slight edge in the power dept but the ac has a better 4wd system (in/out 4wd) you cant really go wrong with ethier of them.

 

The current Arctic Cat 300 is based on the Suzuki King Quad. One thing that Arctic Cat does, like Polaris is they use a few frames and slap a lot of different engines in them to fill out their lineup. I don't like this idea, because you get an under powered quad, Remember the Polaris 335 Sportsman? You don't have to worry about it if you buy the biggest quad in that frame design. I looked at the 300 AC in the show-room and noticed that the rear suspension is really stiff. This might go away under power, or break in like the Polaris Sportsman does. As far as suspension travel goes the numbers are not as important as how good the suspension is set up for what you are going to do. Someone who puts down the trail all day and don't ride aggressively could get by on two inches if it was set right. On the other hand the guy who loads both racks and is a heavy set fellow would need stiffer springs, and if he straps his cargo down good and rides aggressive will need more travel.

The Honda is a newer design, but Arctic Cat is supposed to be re-doing their line up, if you wait you might be able to get one with more features.